When does age and age difference make sex a real problem?

You are actually claiming the root of a word proves I advocate violence on the innocent?

I was simply remarking on YOUR choice of words.

So if I violate the law against not trespassing, you think I go and beat up trees or something?

not to be a grammar nazi, but this is a double negative - and probably says to me that you have not really understood what i have been saying. I suggest you try again. The end result of your sentence would be not trespassing.


No, I do not advocate violence against children and teens,

it seems to me that you are arguing that the age of consent should be lowered. or that provided certain caveats are in place - could be scrapped all together. is this not the case?

You have nothing to say - so you attempt to somehow slander my character (and fail) - because you know you have nothing more that you can say.

Every one of your points have been rebutted to the point where you have nothing more to say.

Perhaps it's time to admit that you are in the wrong and that the Age of Consent is something that should be respected, enforced and remain.
 
At a young age if a girl is to get pregnant, depending on her age say from 10-14, her body is not fully developed to carry a pregnancy and could end up not only killing the child, but the mother as well.

The year is 2012. Ever heard of abortion? BC?

And plenty of 10 year olds have had natural child births. List of youngest birth mothers - Wikipedia Yeah, plenty of C-sections in there, but there are fewer from there up. You make to much of the risks, besides ignoring the fact that pregnancy is totally avoidable.

That is one risk, the other risk is STD's a 14 year old should not be walking around with one because again, it could do major damage to their body and lead to all other sorts of things that could hinder them for the rest of their life or take their life way too early than it should.

Look, we are not talking about banning sex okay? We are talking about lowering the age of consent. In America, there is a strong abstinence movement for teenagers. Result? Half of all STD infections are among teens. Your thinking is precisely backwards. Teens are getting STDs for your style of thinking. You are not protecting them. Quite the opposite.

How do you not find it disgusting that a grown person be man or woman wants to be with a child?

Because I am not a gorilla at the whim of my emotions.

I actually form my opinion of such things by observation and study, not by what the ignorant masses decided was taboo today. Did you know that back when they were arresting homosexuals, the age of consent was generally 10? Now homosexuals are okay, but anyone with a 10 year old is sick, even if they are 12! There is no rhyme or reason for the switch. Its just popular sentiment mixed with animal fear.

If a grown man ever came on to my daughter I would threaten him to within an inch of his life and if I found out that he did anything with her, if she was willing or not,

An extremely immature and reactionary statement, as well as very sex negative. Do you know what the term means? Sex-negativity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I would find and cut his stuff off. It's just disgusting, and you are making yourself sound like a pedophile the way you are arguing this and you're trying to find someone who will justify it for you.

What is disgusting is your casual suggestion at cutting someone's penis off. Do you have any idea how sick that is and how sick you are for even suggesting it?

Probably not. You are from Ohio of all places. Yeah, I used to live there.

---------- Post added at 22:53 ---------- Previous post was at 22:51 ----------

You have nothing to say - so you attempt to somehow slander my character (and fail) - because you know you have nothing more that you can say.

You should re-read your own post buddy. You are the one attempting to slander character here.

---------- Post added at 22:55 ---------- Previous post was at 22:53 ----------

I was simply remarking on YOUR choice of words.

What you wrote was insane. Your attempt to walk away from it is not working.
 
No I am not "sex negative" as you so put it. I am extremely sexually active. I don't hate sex, but I as do most parents do not want my daughter having sex at such a young age. When I was 10-14 I was boy crazy yes, but I didn't go out and have sex. I waited til I was 16 and I regret it, to this very day. I can't change the past and realizing now I don't want to or else I wouldn't have my daughter. The point is... Sex is complicated, it complicates friendships, and relationships. While back in the old days it may have been normal for a 10 year old to have sex, and in some cultures the saying "old enough to bleed, old enough to breed." comes to mind, it still does not make it ok in any way for an ADULT to have sex with someone so young. The one poster said it perfectly. "The older party can use it as a power trip" of course that isn't verbatim but you get the idea. Why do you think people get raped? it's not because the person who does the raping wants sex and can't get it. It's a power trip so they feel like they can have control of something or someone. Same with sex. It's so much more complicated than you seem to understand. NORMAL people who actually care would understand, and from what I've read from this post, you sir... are not normal!

OH! and the whole cutting a mans penis off, it is barbaric, but it's what pedophiles deserve to have happen to them. So what I'm from Ohio. Dear god I never thought I'd say this in my life, but Go bucks!
 
I waited til I was 16 and I regret it, to this very day.

Why? Sorry to get personal, but this point is essential. Why do you regret it?

Why do you think people get raped? it's not because the person who does the raping wants sex and can't get it. It's a power trip so they feel like they can have control of something or someone.

That is propaganda. If it was just about the power trip, they would just abuse, not have sex. Most rape is date rape, and yes, its mostly about wanting sex. I am sorry to see you have bought the hype.

Sex itself contains elements of power and straight sexual desire. So does rape. Rape might have more elements of power tripping than consensual sex, but to exclude sexual desire from the equation altogether is simply nuts. The idea is common enough, but its still nuts.

It's so much more complicated than you seem to understand. NORMAL people who actually care would understand, and from what I've read from this post, you sir... are not normal!

Wow! So by your own admission you skipped most of the posts. I see you just joined today. Yet, you think you know something about my depth of understanding of sex and you know I am not normal.

Be careful. Because you just might find out you are a GD fool.

OH! and the whole cutting a mans penis off, it is barbaric, but it's what pedophiles deserve to have happen to them.

A pedophile is commonly defined as someone with a mental illness. You think people with mental illnesses should all be mutilated?

---------- Post added at 23:40 ---------- Previous post was at 23:17 ----------

No I am not "sex negative" as you so put it. I am extremely sexually active. I don't hate sex,

You don't have to hate sex to have negative views of sex.

but I as do most parents do not want my daughter having sex at such a young age.

Let us say you knew she would not get an STD. Let us say you knew she would not get pregnant or injured. Let us say, you knew the guy would treat her very nicely and they both fancied each other very much. Would you still not want her to have sex? Why?
 
I regret it because it caused a riff in my circle of friends, he denied it, I admitted to it and everyone was believing him so I was made out to look like a desperate liar. That right there caused me mental trauma because I lost all of my friends for a couple years. That and it only lasted about mmm 3 minutes.
I've been raped sir, I think I know a little bit more about it than you do. We went to high school together and decided to hang out one night several years later, and he raped me and left me in downtown Columbus 45 minutes away with no way to get home.
A pedophile is not a mental illness, being a member of the Westboro Baptist Church is a mental illness. A pedophile has an unusual sexual attraction to children, there's no medication to fix or control that sweet heart! I work with the mentally ill and handicapped sir. My clients have no inclination to have sex with small children, just saying!
No I just don't agree that children should be having sex weather it be with someone their own age or older.
I can't stop her from having sex, no I don't want her to have sex until she is sure she is ready for it and know that it is the right choice. People are manipulative jerks now a days and I pretty much trust no one because they pretty much only do things to benefit them, and the most common one is sex. Despite what people think there is no such thing as just sex, eventually one party will develop feelings for the other that the other party involved does not reciprocate and that is when feelings and mental anguish become involved. It may not be during the sex, it's the after effects of it.
 
Take note SevenStars. Unlike you Sorawakaibutsu is actually participating in the conversation and offering personal experiences, rather than just attack someone.

I regret it because it caused a riff in my circle of friends, he denied it, I admitted to it and everyone was believing him so I was made out to look like a desperate liar. That right there caused me mental trauma because I lost all of my friends for a couple years. That and it only lasted about mmm 3 minutes.

So the problem was the guy. So why did you even bring it up? What does your first time with a jerk have to do with age?

If he had been a nice guy you would not have regretted it? Correct? If he had been more experienced, it would have lasted longer? Correct?

In my view, it was the AOC and society that set you up for this fall. Its nothing inherent to do with age. Its everything to do with having ignorance forced upon you and those around you. Your friends abandoned you not because they were young, but because they were ignorant, because society made sure they were ignorant. That is what I want to change.

And do you think the guy may have denied it because he was embarrassed about his poor performance?

I've been raped sir, I think I know a little bit more about it than you do. We went to high school together and decided to hang out one night several years later, and he raped me and left me in downtown Columbus 45 minutes away with no way to get home.

Well I am sorry about your bad experience, but you have to accept the fact that being a victim does not make you an expert on the psychology of rapists. Perhaps if you were the one doing the raping it would take you a lot further down that path.

Do you honestly believe he raped you only for the power trip, and not at all for some sexual jollies? Look, I am sorry if it disturbs you to think of it that way. I am sorry if it gives you some sort of comfort to believe it was just a power trip and nothing sexual. But we are not going to get anywhere entertaining self deceptions that make you feel good. I hope you can accept that.

A pedophile is not a mental illness, being a member of the Westboro Baptist Church is a mental illness. A pedophile has an unusual sexual attraction to children, there's no medication to fix or control that sweet heart! I work with the mentally ill and handicapped sir. My clients have no inclination to have sex with small children, just saying!

A strange choice of words. Why did you put the word "unusual" in there? It suggest there is a "usual" attraction to children. Yet, I don't think you believe that at all. But here is some news for you.

In 1989 Briere and Runtz conducted a study on 193 male undergraduate students concerning pedophilia. Of the sample, 21 percent acknowledged sexual attraction to some small children; nine percent reported sexual fantasies involving children; five percent admitted masturbating to these fantasies; and seven percent conceded some probability of actually having sex with a child if they could avoid detection and punishment. The authors also noted that "given the probable social undesirability of such admissions, [one could] hypothesize that the actual rates ... were even higher.".

A study by Hall et al. of Kent State University found that, of their sample of 80 adult male volunteers, 20 percent reported some attraction to prepubescent girls and 32.5 percent exhibited sexual arousal to heterosexual pedophilic stimuli that equaled or exceeded their arousal to the adult stimuli.

Pedophilia

It seems you want to bloodily castrate about 20 percent of the adult male population.

But I do think pedophiles have a mental illness. But I define a pedophile not as someone attracted to minors or children, but rather someone who cannot control their urges (and I mean control, not stop entirely). 20 percent of the male population simply cannot be mentally ill.

No I just don't agree that children should be having sex weather it be with someone their own age or older.

Strange how you can switch from a mild opinion like that to "Cut off his junk if he touches her!" You seem very conflicted.

I can't stop her from having sex, no I don't want her to have sex until she is sure she is ready for it and know that it is the right choice. People are manipulative jerks now a days and I pretty much trust no one because they pretty much only do things to benefit them, and the most common one is sex. Despite what people think there is no such thing as just sex, eventually one party will develop feelings for the other that the other party involved does not reciprocate and that is when feelings and mental anguish become involved. It may not be during the sex, it's the after effects of it.

In other words, if your daughter hooked up a man who genuinely cared for her it would be okay?

Can you think of any way to avoid your daughter hooking up with a manipulative jerk besides having a high AOC and forbidding sex? Don't you think that by admitting you cannot stop her, yet saying you don't want her to means you are screwing yourself and her by fighting the wind? Don't you think that if you encouraged what you think will happen anyway, and actively participate, that you can better ensure a positive outcome?

I think you are setting your daughter up for a fall the same as you had. I think you are trying to work within the confines of the same erroneous concepts you were subjected to. Instead, you should go the complete other direction. You should encourage her to have sex and you should convince her to bring any potential partner over for dinner so can vet him yourself. And you should forget about his age. Just look at the man.

And do you think there is any chance of emotional anguish for not having sex and not having a real genuine boyfriend for years on end that could be equal to or exceed a break up?

I believe that teen runaways, drug use, alcoholism and many other problems of teen angst and trauma are, in part, caused by a foolish attempt to stunt their socio-sexual growth. I also believe that this sense you have that people are more manipulative today is also caused by trying to put the brakes on and making people sexually desperate. I do not believe these things were such a problem back when early teen girls were marrying much older men, not that I even believe a marriage was or is necessary.
 
I still think you're trying to find a reason to justify pedophilia... I'm done here. this topic has done nothing but piss me off once again. don't touch too many children now you hear?
 
I still think you're trying to find a reason to justify pedophilia... I'm done here. this topic has done nothing but piss me off once again. don't touch too many children now you hear?

I think you are just looking for an excuse to dodge my questions. I think you are afraid to re-think anything about this topic, because you are $#!T scared of what you might find.

It hardly matters if I am trying to justify anything or not. I have asked questions and made rational arguments. I have used scientific evidence to back some points up.

But you? You bow out with an ad hominem and don't bother with even the most basic and harmless of questions. You are what we call a "flat-Earther".

Don't let the door hit you on the way out lady.
 
Hm it won't let me quote for some reason.

I wanted to stay out of this thread. I really did. I certainly have nothing to "contribute" to this fascinating debate. I should probably just hold my tongue. But SevenStars's criticism of Zorro's grammar and supposed lack of understanding of the English language drew me out. This, coming from a person who apparently can't even distinguish between a period and a comma, or "your" and "you're", is something that I find deeply offensive and simply cannot abide.

And yes, Zorro, you're creepy. I think that goes without saying.

And yes, SevenStars, some of your posts sound like you're on drugs. And you're also creepy. You seem to take a little too much pride in your supposed ability to brainwash kids.

...And what an imagination you have... ::shudders::
 
Last edited:
And yes, Zorro, you're creepy. I think that goes without saying.

So not my arguments and not my stance on a topic. Me?

I find it creepy that someone can call me creepy based on my stance on a single topic!

Yes, I know that society dictates I can be fair, rational and scientific on any topic but this one. I know I am "supposed" to either take the party line or shut up on this one. Well F the party and F society. No one is served by the truth about a topic like this being unspeakable under pain of being labeled creepy. There are real problems in the world you know, such as lawyers and an entire justice system using the high AOC as a cash cow, and they do. Its now a big money maker to lock up a 19 year old man who got a bj from his 14 year old GF, from the court appointed defense attorney, to the judge that sentenced him, to the jailors at his prison, to the parole officer charged with making sure he stays away from schools the rest of his life. Honestly, if you find me creepy, you have avoided any sort of serious study or deep thought on the topic, all because society threatened to label you.

Now I find that to be EXTREMELY creepy.

I am happy though, that I only got that "honorable" mention in your post and not the hard and specific criticism you gave the others.
 
I have slightly cleaned up and reopened the thread. Let's please stay on topic and keep it friendly.
 
Something I think I should point out immediately is that this thread is about SEX itself, and not peripheral issues such as dating, manipulation and getting used. That said, I don't mind bringing up peripheral issues so long as sex is addressed by itself in some form. So if you think sex is not a problem, but manipulation is, you need to say that clearly. Sex itself is not manipulation, nor do I think it safe or fair to assume manipulation based on age difference or laws on paper that changed over time.

Also I think that it is important to point out that this is about the possible DETRIMENTS of sex, not the possible BENEFITS. In other words, what is the harm? That said, again, so long as the detriment part is duly addressed by posters, I will be happy to discuss the benefit part.
 
I am not exactly sure how this discussion relates to Japan (in that this website concerns Japanese Reference™)? It is not specified….

First, I scammed over this form quickly and noted that Wikipedia was cited as a resource and have noticed this with other discussions as well. As a collegiate graduate who had to write his fair share of scholarly works (in Japanese and English) and even had to defend a thesis is front of a committee of intimidating external examiners - why would anyone cite Wikipedia as a reliable source?

Wikipedia may be useful as a primary source on popular culture (and that's a stretch), or for subjects that have not been addressed in the scholarly literature. For more academic topics, however, it cannot compete with peer-reviewed journals or the library's specialized encyclopedias and online resources.
[Refer to http://www.library.cornell.edu/olinuris/ref/research/skill26.htm]

Wikipedia website (English version) also has a disclaimer that states that "citation of Wikipedia in research are considered unacceptable".


The same can be said of online news article, and even popular news organizations such as Times, CNN, New York Post or 株式会社日本経済新聞社. These are considered non-scholar or popular sources.

I do not mean to imply that we can't use these sources to highlight our opinions, but rather to think critically when using these information sources.
________________________________________________________________
On to the controversial topic:


Should teenagers be considered as having the same intellectual capacity as adults? Whom are we kidding? "Kidding," an ironic word given this topic. We certainly are not "kidding" our youth, not if we are treating them as adults. And we are not "kidding" ourselves, since there is nothing funny about subjecting teenagers to the death penalty or causing them to accept full financial and civil responsibility for the consequences of "consensual" sex, that in many jurisdictions, we label statutory rape.

The fact is, I found some of the theories stated on this form to be flawed and others thought provoking -- Consent laws are not just about sex. Nor is there a national consensus that exists concerning adolescent capacity to consent to sex. The laws gives differing legal significance to adolescent "consent" to teen-adult sex depending upon a variety of factors.

The arguments presented here can be summed as: Is consent being able to make a rational choice...being aware of all the consequences? How is it that a 15-year-old cannot make a rational choice, but yet a 25-year-old is automatically assumed to be able to? Are the age of consent laws are biased and do not take into account the individual's ability to make choices, and assumes that anyone under the legal age is incapable of making a rational decision?

As adults we are 'supposedly' charged with looking through a lens made wider by experience and anticipate consequences that often show themselves only after the passage of time. It then is no surprise when some women & men, years later are able to reflect and recognize the subtle and explicit consequences that they were unable to consider when they were much younger. In this sense, sometimes this leads one to understand that aspects of their own history, sometimes traumatic, had caused them to have been less ''consenting" than they imagined. To speak of ''consent" under these circumstances is at best naive.

When I went back to the UK to study, there was a controversial man named Tom Martin, who considers himself a leading UK Men's Right Activist. This bloke had the audacity to imply that TEN-year-old children who were trafficked into the sex industry and engaged in prostitution "were not really victims, but economic actors making an economic choice". He continued that the legal principle of no arbitrary minimum age for consent requires whether lawful sex had taken place was to establish whether the child or young person 'understands the meaning of consent'. In another comment, Martin suggests that ten-year-olds who have been the victims of what some people insist on calling "real rape" would be offended by anyone thinking that ten-year-old prostitutes suffer from rape – when, after all, the child prostitutes have "agreed" to it. However, Martin doesn't actually think ten year olds should be prostitutes. On-the contrary- rather he <is deluded enough to> think(s) they should wait a few years, until they're at least 14.
_____________________________________________

The best way to illustrate this discussion in a more scientific-sound context is to consider the field of neuroscience. Neuroscience has made great strides over the past decades in revealing that remarkable changes occur in the brain during the second decade of life. Contrary to long held ideas that the brain-the most complicated 3 lb mass of matter in the known universe--was mostly grown-up by the end of childhood, it is now clear that adolescence is a time of profound brain growth and change. In fact, the brain of an early adolescent in comparison to that of a late adolescent differs measurably in anatomy, biochemistry and physiology.


Why does this matter?
It matters because impulse control, planning and decision-making are largely frontal cortex functions that are still maturing during adolescence. Why does this relate to the "consent of age" debate? It relates BECAUSE- the large and compelling body of scientific research on the neurological development of teens confirms that long held, common sense view that: teenagers are not the same as adults in a variety of key areas such as the ability to make sound judgments when confronted by complex impulses, and the ability to plan effectively.

Indeed teens can be full of promise, mature for their age (and perhaps even gone through sexual maturity more quickly then their peers) and able to make remarkable spurts in intellectual development and learning.

NONETHELESS- neurologically speaking, they are NOT adults. They are, as we say in the proper sense, a work in progress and do not reach neurological maturity until their early 20s (both applies to men and female-no exceptions).

In sum or to repeat again- (I think Americans call it "to sound like a "broken-record"??) during adolescents, a teen is developing and is unable to accurately understand impulse control, planning for the future, appreciating cause and effect, and decision making. These are important skills that rely on numerous interconnecting cognitive components that emerge as the brain develops during adolescents.
__________________________________________________________
STUDIES:

In 1999, Neuropsychologist Dr. Deborah Yurgelun-Todd studied the responses of adults and children, eleven to seventeen years of age, to the pictures of faces exhibiting emotions, including fear. In response to the fear face, adults correctly identified the emotion. Teens answered correctly only about fifty percent of the time, identifying the emotion as shock, surprise, or anger. Teens also used different parts of their brains to evaluate the face and process their own emotions during the test. While adult responses came from the frontal cortex, teen responses originated in the amygdala. *

Consequently, this research shows that teens' use of the amygdala produced reactions rather than rational thought. It can be concluded that immature teen brains produce impulsive and even "risk-taking behavior."

Yurgelun-Todd study suggests that perhaps decision-making in teenagers is not what we thought. . . . Just because they're physically mature, they may not appreciate the consequences or weigh information the same way as adults do.
________________________________________

Finally, this is why I find it ridiculous when some people assume that if teenagers LOOK physically mature they then should BE more emotionally and mentally mature.

A person cannot help his or her immaturity. Immaturity is a natural stage of teen development. We do not condemn the mentally challenged for their failure to comprehend. Similarly, we should not blame the immature for their failure to act maturely.

For these reasons, I argue against any countries judicial evaluation of the teen's "consent" to lower the age, which may invite further abuse and traumatization. In fact, I argue for some countries (such as Japan and even Korea) to reconsider raising the consent age.
 
Last edited:
_______________________________________________
RELATE THIS TO JAPAN (because otherwise this whole discussion doesn't make sense to post on a Japanese Reference website):​

As a Japanese citizen, there are many things that I am proud of (such as our low crime rate) but I am horrified at my government's inability to address our crisis of sexual exploitation and abuse of minors. Japanese law allows for consent at age 12, but this only applies to metro Tokyo. Japan's federal laws put sexual consent at 13 years old under the Japanese national criminal law code. However, all municipalities and prefectures have their own particular laws such as Tokyo's ツ"Youth Protection Lawツ" which prohibit adults from having sex with youths who are under 17 years old or 18.

This incomprehensible gap of the legal ツ"consent of ageツ" has lead to much confusion. For example, it means that 窶ー窶。ツ鞘?「ナ津ーツ催 (ツ"compensated datingツ" where high-school aged girls are paid by older men to ツ"dateツ" or otherwise render sexual service) can be or cannot be charged with statutory rape (in that it depends on jurisdiction). And since this is Asia, lets consider Korea, in which the age of consent is different for men and women. A book entitled Gyoyanginul Ouihan Saegyaesa (교양인을 위한 세계사), or World History for Civilized People by Kim Yun-tae: states that in Korea the age of consent is 18 for men, and 16 for women.
Let me make a point by saying that the idea of an age of legal consent is almost certainly modern. Japanese rewrote many of the legal codes based on European, primarily Germanic law.

Regardless, empirical Japanese studies of childhood sexual abuse are rare. The few studies that do exist are mostly case studies involving low numbers of respondents. These are usually highly subjective, mostly legal or psychiatric in orientation and cannot be generalized to the Japanese population. In Japan this topic is often avoided as unpleasant; consequently, it is not discussed in conversation and not investigated in research.

However, I believe this subject is a compelling social problem that merits the attention of social scientists.
While Japan's sexual abuse may be roughly lower, compared with the USA and even Germany, Japan nonetheless has a significant distortion of social perceptions by victims of sexual abuse, and even victims of exhibitionism.

End of post
________________________________________

Resources:
Not sure of others Japanese comprehension, but if you can read Japanese then refer to a mainstream scandal involving AKB48, Minami Takahashi 44 year old mother. The mother, divorced was arrested and fined 500,000 yen for having relations several times with a 15 year-old boy.

AKB48ツ坂?壺?ケ'窶堙昶?堙遺?堙昶?堙娯?「テェツ親窶堋ェツ、15ツ催篠渉ュ窶扼窶堙??コツ行窶覇窶ケ^窶堙??佚溪?「テ Iツ「窶昶?披?堙ァ窶堙ェ窶堙?絶?昶?ーテア窶堙「窶堙≫?堋スツ」
7窶愿コツ、9窶愿コ窶堙俄?敖ュ窶昶?樞?能窶凖ィ窶堙個「ツ週ナ?ツァ窶「ツカツ春 2ナ椎ス16窶愿コツ坂??ツ」窶堋ェツ「AKB48窶堙個坂?壺?ケ'窶堙昶?堙遺?堙昶?堙娯?「テェツ親窶堋ェヒ?コツ行窶覇窶ケ^窶堙 窶佚溪?「テ淞」
窶堙遺?堙ゥニ湛ニ誰ツーニ致窶堙ー窶「テア窶堋カ窶堙ゥ窶堋ア窶堙??堋ェ窶敖サ窶督セツ、ニ値ニ鍛ニ暖ツ湘」窶堙??堙坂?堋キ窶堙??堙俄?佚・窶堋ォ窶堙依彙窶佚ィ 窶堙ー窶堙ヲ窶堙ア窶堙??堋「窶堙ゥツ。
窶慊ッ窶ケLナス窶凪?堙??堙債、窶冢ナ陳ウ窶堙個渉ュ窶扼ニ丹ニ停?ケツーニ致窶堙?ツ人窶堋ゥ窶堙ァ窶「ツキ窶堋「窶堋スヒ彙窶堙??堋オ窶堙?、ツ坂?壺?ケ'窶堙昶?堙遺?堙昶?堙娯?「テェツ親窶堋ェツ、
ニ停?榿停?愴鱈ツーツ渉ュ窶扼A窶堙??テ滅淡窶堙ーナスツ昶?堙≫?堋スナ弛ヒ?懌?堙俄?堙や?堋「窶堙?湘堋催冷?堋ェ窶凖披?堙ァ窶堙ェ窶堙??堋「窶堙ゥ Bツ坂?壺?ケ'窶堙昶?堙遺?堙昶?堙娯?「テェツ親窶堙債、
ナ竹窶拿ナ?E窶愿シ窶堙ィ窶堋オ窶堋ス窶督コ窶堙ーツ鞘?「窶堋ッ窶堙??ーナセ窶ー窶。窶堋キ窶堙ゥヒ?ェ窶「テサツ、窶伉ァナスq窶堙ー窶廴ヒ?、窶堋キ 窶堙ゥヒ?ェ窶禿岩?堙?窶堋?窶堙ィツ、ツ坂?壺?ケ'窶堙昶?堙遺?堙昶?堙娯?凖ュ窶堙
ツ親窶堋オ窶堋ゥ窶堙≫?堋スツ渉ュ窶扼A窶堙債、窶凖ュ窶堙??堙固?テ滅淡窶堙ーツ鞘?壺?堙俄?「テェツ親窶堙問?昶?披?堙≫?堋ス窶堙 ツウ窶堙ェツ、窶「テェツ親窶堙坂?伉ァナスq窶ーテね?、窶堋ウ窶堙娯?堋?窶堙懌?堙ィ窶堙
窶冉窶堙ゥ窶堋ア窶堙??堋ェ窶堙??堋ォ窶堋クツ、ツ絶?昶?ーテア窶堙俄?從窶堙≫?堙?渉ュ窶扼A窶堙??テ滅淡窶堙ーナスツ昶?堙≫?堋ス テ??堋「窶堋、ツ。
窶堋サ窶堙娯?禿ョツ静ヲツ、ヒ?ェ窶「窶敞陳?断ニ達ニ但窶堋ェ窶愬停?ケナセ窶徭ツ静つ渉ュ窶扼ナ停?吮?牢ヒ?ァツ青ャツ湘ー窶氾。ヒ?。 窶敖ス窶覇窶ケ^窶堙俄?堙ヲ窶堙ィ窶「テェツ親窶堋ェ窶佚溪?「テ溪?堋ウ窶堙ェ窶堋ス窶堙??「テア窶堋カ窶堋スツ。
窶慊ッ窶「テア窶慊ケ窶堙??堙債「AKB48ニ陳?停?愴弛ツー窶堙娯?「テェツ」窶堙??堋オ窶堙??堋ィ窶堙ィツ、ツ坂?壺?ケ'窶「テェ窶堙娯?督シ窶楼窶堋ア窶堋サ窶堙遺?堋「窶堙?窶堙娯?堙個、ツ週ナ?ツァ 窶「ツカツ春窶堙娯?「テア窶堋ゥ窶堙ァ
窶慊ッヒ?ェツ人窶「ツィ窶堙??堋?窶堙ゥ窶ーテや?拿ツ青ォ窶堙坂?ケテ俄?堙溪?堙?坂?壺?堋ュツ、窶堋キ窶堙??堙俄?板ェナスツョ窶ケN窶亙窶堋ウ 窶堙ェツ、50窶毒凪?ー~窶堙娯?敖ア窶ケテ?ナ炭窶堋ェナ?m窶凖ィ窶堋オ窶堙??堋「窶堙ゥ窶堙ヲ窶堋、窶堋セ窶堋ェツ、
ニ値ニ鍛ニ暖ナ断ナスツヲ窶敕や?堙坂?ーナ?ツ湘」ツ湘ウ窶佚披?堙可。
ツ坂?壺?ケ'窶堋ェツ焦?窶伉ョ窶堋キ窶堙ゥ窶拮ツ青カニ丹ニ停?ケツーニ致ツ"ニ知ツーニ湛ニ椎?ツーニ置ニ湛ツ"窶督シ窶ケ`窶堙姑置ニ陳哉丹ツ・ニ坦ニ陳?停?愴暖窶披?懌?堙俄?堙?ツ、
ツ「窶堋ィ窶「テェ窶堋ウ窶堙アツ、窶佚・ツ湘、窶「v窶堋ゥツ?ツ!ツ」ツ「ヒ?ェツ人窶堋カ窶堙。窶堙遺?堋「ツ、窶督。窶「テサ窶堋セ窶堙ヲ ツ!ツ」ツ「ニ稚ニ叩ニ停?懌?堙最陳ゥナステ娯?堙??堋ス窶堙ィ窶堋オ窶堙懌?堋ケ窶堙アツ」
ツ「窶ーツス窶堋ェ窶堋?窶堙≫?堙??堙?ナスツォ窶堙溪?堙遺?堋「窶堙?」窶堙遺?堙?、窶敕楪鞘?披?堙ーツ心窶掏窶堋キ窶堙ゥツ鞘?倪?堋ォ ツ最セ窶堙昶?堋ェナスE窶愬セ窶堋オ窶堙??堋「窶堙ゥツ。
ツ「AKB48窶堙??堙債坂?壺?ケ'窶堙昶?堙遺?堙昶?堙娯?堋ア窶堙??堙??堋?窶堙ゥツ」ツ。ツ秋ナ陳ウツ康窶堙俄?堋ア窶堋、 ツセ窶堙ュ窶堋オ窶堙淞、ニ丹ニ停?ケツーニ致窶牢窶佚娯?堙ーナステヲ窶堙ィ窶堙懌?堙??堙溪?堙ゥ
窶敕楪鞘?披?堙個静凪?戮ナ?'窶堙娯?ケツュ窶堋ウ窶堙ーツ考窶堋ヲ窶堙ゥ窶堙?、ツ債。ナ津」窶堙固?ヒ??慊ョ窶堙俄?佚・窶堋ォ窶堙遺?ーe 窶ケツソ窶堙ー窶ケy窶堙壺?堋キ窶堋ア窶堙??堙坂?「Kナスナ?窶堋ゥツ。
AKB48ツケテ「ツカツカツ、テ淞、テ環、テ淞、テ偲甘ャツソテ?づ。テ甘。ツ。ツ「ツ・テ債・テδ・テ按、テ渉アテェツセテ・ツセテオテづ鳴、テ?ツ・テ按・テ板・テδ・ツッツ・テ仰・テ・ツ。ツシツ・ツケ) - ツケテアテ?「 - livedoor ツ・テ仰・テ・ツ。ツシツ・ツケ

Peer-review journals:
*www.icn.ucl.ac.uk/sblakemore/SJ_papers/BlaCho_jcpp_06.pdf
*National Center for Biotechnology Information › Journal List › NIHPA Author Manuscripts


Other sources cited:

*CHILD ADOLESCENT PSYCHIATRY 195, 198 (1999); Interview: Deborah
Yurgelun-Todd, supra note 53 (Dr. Preuss commented here that adults
presumably use both the amygdala and the frontal cortex. He explained
that the ツ"amygdala is activated in studies of adult emotion recognition,
especially fear.ツ").
*Brief for the Petitioner, Roper v. Simmons, U.S. (2004) No. 03-633, 2004 WL 903158, at *33-34 (ツ"There is certainly a point at which age is an appropriate proxy
for determining whether imposing capital punishment on an individual makes sense, even without legislation. In the common law, it was age seven. . . . . Under the consensus recognized in Thompson and Stanford, it is sixteen.ツ")
 
Last edited:
why would anyone cite Wikipedia as a reliable source?

If you have a problem with anything on Wikipedia, follow the citation that is the ACTUAL source and debate from there.

It makes me sick to have people come on here and say Wiki is unreliable. Wiki is well referenced. Wiki is not perfect, but nothing is.

Most of the time when I link to wiki, its just a convenient way for YOU to track things I have already cross-referenced and knew before I dug up the wiki link.

These posts are not research but rather opinions supported by (if we are lucky) the research of others.

So, don't knock wiki. You have a problem with any quote, be specific, and you may or may not get more detail.

And if that is not good enough for you, and you continue to dismiss wiki, then I will dismiss any research that comes from America. I think if it came down to it I would have the better case since the U.S. Congress decided to squelch research coming out of the APA. The APA has been neutered, and all other researchers have taken note and won't publish anything that might rile up the peasants or the politicians that have them as constituents.

And dude, your double posting truly sucks @$$. Talk about unprofessional. Next time a link will be quite sufficient.
 
Its interesting yami yami how you can write so many words and provide so much research but not actually address the topic of the thread. You talked about consent and consequences, but you never really spelled out what consequences there are nor how those consequences are realized for your opinion of not having the capacity to consent.

If you don't understand think about this: I was sometimes awoken to sex by my ex-wife. I did not consent, but nor was I harmed. Next, I was too young to consent to my family taking me to an amusement park by car several times (could have been seriously injured in a car crash or roller coaster mishap) but I was not harmed, nor am I troubled in hindsight. Next, when I engaged in sex play with other children when I was under 10, according to your thinking, neither of us could consent. But neither of us were harmed.

Just because someone did not or could not consent does not necessarily mean they were harmed or even the slightest bit bothered. Sometimes people give us what we want and like without asking. The way you make things out, a kid cannot consent to a Coke from their own parents because they are not fully informed of the contents of the Coke. But you know, neither are the parents! The first time I drank Dr. Pepper I was nine. I thought it was disgusting. But that does not mean my ignorance about the taste meant I lacked capacity to consent, nor does it mean I was traumatized.

So I am looking forward to your next post if and when you actually address the topic.

And as I said more in detail in the "sickness or crime" thread, if you want to hold to this idea of lack of capacity to consent at certain ages, then that is easily solved by parental consent. I doubt you would balk at the idea of parental consent for an operation, so why would you for sex?
 
When criticizing do so in a constructive fashion without the use of character slurs
And dude, your double posting truly sucks @$$. Talk about unprofessional….. Frankly, I think you have been bamboozled by tabloid journalism.)

It does not inspire me to take the time from my day and research & respond appropriately to questions asked if I am left with the impression I am dealing with a Argumentum ad Ignorantum situation.

Those who criticize need to value and invite criticism in a constructive fashion. Criticism can be promoted if the critic first invites criticism of his or her own behavior without resorting to petty responses. By inviting criticism, a person can create a situation in which her or his criticism of another is perceived as appropriate, rather than attacks.

Engage in perspective taking or role reversal. As you develop a criticism strategy or response, try to understand the perspective of the person being criticized rather than insisting that your opinions are the only acceptable way of thinking.

Invite a collaborative discussion of consequences rather than stating your assumptions are the only correct ones.

Include in your critical feedback a positive "outlet." Reinforce positive actions and invite the possibility of change. Otherwise the other criticizer will see it useless to even attempt an exchange of words

Listen & read actively. Even though criticism may hurt, seek to understand accurately the criticism being presented. 
 It is perfectly fine to paraphrase what the other is saying and ask questions to increase understanding (which I note you have done with some of your points/questions. But nonetheless-nonverbal-foul displays (perceptions) were not checked.)

Work hard to avoid becoming defensive. Resist any tendency to want to dismiss criticism or retaliate.

For those reasons- I will not respond until I read a reaction post where I do not encounter any personal slander and do not feel 'absolute' retaliation. In other words- it's a waste of time to devote the effort for a constructive debate if I am the only one adhering to to this.
 
When criticizing do so in a constructive fashion without the use of character slurs

I did not slur your character. You cut and paste part of your own post into a related thread, and while unprofessional might not be the right word, you know what I mean. I criticized your action, not your character.

But if you are going to try and defend the practice, go for it.

As for being bamboozled by tabloid journalism, that is not a slur on your character either. People get fooled, even geniuses. If I slurred anybody it was tabloid journalists.

So are you telling me there is in fact a crisis of sex abuse in Japan, and that you have actual proof of this? Cause if you don't, what could be your reason for claiming there is, except that you were fooled by the news media that makes everything into a crisis?

And we are not going to get to the truth by sitting in ivory towers and being respectful of everything that comes along. I did not disrespect you but rather some of the ideas you presented. I did not criticize you, but rather some things you said, like irrationally trying to tie the non-existent crisis to the national AOC, despite the fact that nearly all prefectures make it higher. Did I just say you were irrational? No I did not. I said you said something irrational, and you failed to define the basis of your statement, which was irrational.

I suggest you not take any of that personally, because if you do, you give us cause to think you should and us too. In other words, its you who makes it a criticism of your character, because I did not mean it that way.

I ask you not to be so thin-skinned in a forum debate.

I could have been just as sensitive about you accusing me and others of using wiki as a primary source when its not quite true. But I didn't. I just explained the situation to you.

---------- Post added at 10:31 ---------- Previous post was at 10:19 ----------

Not sure of others Japanese comprehension, but if you can read Japanese then refer to a mainstream scandal involving AKB48, Minami Takahashi 44 year old mother. The mother, divorced was arrested and fined 500,000 yen for having relations several times with a 15 year-old boy.

I can read some Japanese...with effort. But I am not going to make the effort until you explain the reason for posting this. I cannot think of any reason why it would be related to the topic at hand unless there is something in there about that 15 year old being harmed somehow.

In fact, I think odds are strong that the only problem the 15 year old has is that outsiders got involved and messed up his sex life and took his lover away from him.

People often post things like that and get angry at me for not seeing what they see simply because they projected things into the story that were not there. But one should not take it personal if they imagined things in the story that did not exist and I called them on it. What else can I do?
 
I am not exactly sure how this discussion relates to Japan (in that this website concerns Japanese Reference™)? It is not specifiedツ….

Personally I came here for research questions about Japan. This reason still stands, though I haven't actually asked such questions in more than a month. I also like to engage in discussions like this one. They do not need to be related to Japan specifically, luckily, or I wouldn't be able to contribute much.
I guess the concentration of Japanese posters here on itself, will give any subject a touch of Japan.

Wikipedia may be useful as a primary source on popular culture (and that's a stretch), or for subjects that have not been addressed in the scholarly literature. For more academic topics, however, it cannot compete with peer-reviewed journals or the library's specialized encyclopedias and online resources.
[Refer to http://www.library.cornell.edu/olinuris/ref/research/skill26.htm]
Wikipedia website (English version) also has a disclaimer that states that ツ"citation of Wikipedia in research are considered unacceptableツ".

The same can be said of online news article, and even popular news organizations such as Times, CNN, New York Post or ナ?窶敘スツョ窶ーテッナステ絶?愿コ窶怒ナ弛ツ催渉新窶「ツキナステ? These are considered non-scholar or popular sources.
I do not mean to imply that we can't use these sources to highlight our opinions, but rather to think critically when using these information sources.


Academic citations need to conform to many specific qualifications. Among other things, they need to be about original research, and in a specific format. They also need to be peer reviewed themselves, preferably been cited before, and having cited many other highly praised sources. Scientific research groups and laboratories' qualifications are often measured by the amount of citations they have gotten in the past.
In the case of exact sciences, the cited text alone needs to be enough to duplicate or falsify the described experiments, by a comparatively qualified laboratory.

So no, obviously Wikipedia won't do :) Not much would, and certainly no freely accessible and open source.

Yet I find Wikipedia often a valuable source on especially sensitive issues. On such issues I often feel the less people agree with it, the more balanced it just might be. Where other sources are written by few authors who might easily not be neutral (even "exact" sciences often tend to be biased towards those who fund them), Wikipedia contains contributions from many different angles. This often translates itself in a balanced text unlike any other.
I don't feel Wikipedia needs to compete with peer reviewed sources. And I also disprove of the attitude that dismisses wiki articles based on them being wiki articles. As Zorro said; I wouldn't mind if people attack such quotes if they're specific and they back it up.

On to the controversial topic:

When I was into scouting, often relations happened between adults and minors. I could write specifics, but I'd rather not ;)
I'm sure you understand that relationships between a leader and someone under his leadership, could strain a leader's need to be impartial and could undermine his authority.

During my own leading years I've always been against such relationships. I've had to resist some "advances" from very beautiful, but minor girls (range of, say 15-17 years old - younger never interested me at all). Let me tell you, often there is not just "consent" involved by minors, but they can be quite assertive in their own approaches. This can begin at very young ages; I've had approaches by 10 year olds, but they're usually very basic and silly.

I might have been against this, but now that I am a few years older, I have never seen anyone being traumatized by these things in any way. On the contrary, though obviously not all of those ended well, many youngsters ended up with experience and earlier maturity.
I don't mean to say I'm in favour of such relationships today, but rather that they're never black or white; all depends on circumstances, which are always different. And those outside of these relationships are not always in the best position to judge.

Ten years old is WAY too young though. They're totally children, nagging your ears off about silly, childish subjects.
In some places such children are regarded as old enough. This is a big humanitarian problem. I've seen a documentary on a village in Somalia. Dozens of men sat together, when a reporter asked, whom of them have had wives who died in childbirth. More than half of them lifted their hand. I still shudder when I think about that.
 
I disagree with Waribald on several points, but I salute his post anyway. He has obviously given the subject some serious thought and he is treating it NOT in a reactionary fashion, but calmly addressing points. With a person like this its not necessary to argue as he is so much closer to the truth than most.

So no, obviously Wikipedia won't do Not much would, and certainly no freely accessible and open source.

This is so true. Nothing is perfect. And the best of the best is not generally available. There was one woman on another forum who had access to university research, but she could not show me any of it. What good is that? If she made a mistake in her interpretation, I can't point it out, and I am not just going to take anyone's word for everything.

When I was into scouting, often relations happened between adults and minors. I could write specifics, but I'd rather not ;)

I hope you change your mind. That is EVIDENCE, and its the lack of such evidence to gets people forming their reactionary, negative opinions as they tend to GUESS the result must be disaster. On the opposite side, the news fills in evidence of the worst case scenario, and with nothing to balance or help find the truth or middle ground, and that is part of the reason they guess it must always be disaster. Even fictional movies play their part. I just watched part of "The Lovely Bones" and remarked how its movies like that twist people's beliefs about MAPs. The overwhelming majority are not remotely predators.

In fact, if you look up the wiki on Doug Hutchison, the actor who married the 16 year old, it tells of how an actual therapist who should damn well know better, thought Doug must be some kind of predator. Turns out that she later discovered its HER who controls him!

Though Berman was eventually surprised by the dynamic between the two, she commented on her initial hesitations about working with the couple, saying, "I believe it was the wrong decision to let a 16-year-old marry a man in his 50s. It's uncomfortable to see… [at first] I said to my producer, 'I think this guy is a pedophile…I don't know if I can work with these people.' I don't condone it, but I do see that this is a married couple that is genuinely married and they have marital issues that needed to be worked on. I came in saying, 'She's a victim, he's a predator.' What I found out was that she has a lot more power in this relationship, and he is far more powerless, than I expected. His family has completely disowned him… He, unfortunately, has nothing besides her." Hutchison was also defended by Stodden's mother, Krista Keller, who praised him for the kindness with which he treats Stodden

Chris got worked over by the public, despite the marriage being legal. I mean people were suggesting castration with a rusty spoon etc. Unless positive evidence is fairly delivered in the bulk that we both know exists, this damaging and insane hysteria will continue unabated.

But it seems no one wants to talk publicly about the postives of their love lives, and that goes double if there was anything illegal or perceived as immoral. So we only hear of the complaints and the court cases and arrests. And the small-minded become witch hunters and the neo-Victorian Puritan rock spiders spew their sex negative agenda without much opposition.

Let me tell you, often there is not just "consent" involved by minors, but they can be quite assertive in their own approaches. This can begin at very young ages; I've had approaches by 10 year olds, but they're usually very basic and silly.

Absolutely. But it disturbes me how people just dismiss such feelings and expressions of them as being meaningless, worthless or even dangerous or immoral, especially when it comes to girls standing up and making their own approach, something they should not feel at all ashamed about. And its funny how society then turns around and talks about the need to empower girls and young women! Like, "Hello!" Maybe society should not squash them in the first place?!?

I might have been against this, but now that I am a few years older, I have never seen anyone being traumatized by these things in any way. On the contrary, though obviously not all of those ended well, many youngsters ended up with experience and earlier maturity.

That speaks directly to thread, which others have avoided, so thank you for that clear statement. I too have neve seen any trauma. Its almost like a myth and we are trying to prove there is no Zeus. But people firmly believe the myth with no evidence. How can we combat that?

Ten years old is WAY too young though.

I think you need way better proof than what happens in piss poor, backward, uneducated Somalia.

I also think you need better proof than pregnancy. Sex does not equal pregnancy, nor does marriage, nor should they. Even if we looked at the age of the youngest mothers in places with decent medical care for females, the risk to teens and preteens is only a few percentage points higher if I remember my research correctly. Granted there are more C-sections though. But don't take that to mean I advocate young pregnancy, because I do not. I am just saying that that is a risk that is exaggerated. I bet in Somalia, pregnant women die at a higher rate than most places at any age.

So I say forget Somalia. What would happen if your neighbor dated a ten year old? Or you? Not saying you want to, but do you think you would harm him or her accidentally or on purpose? Or that the situation would inherently be harmful?

I don't see any problems coming from it directly, for the most part. The biggest problem I see is going to be third party as people break out the torches and pitchforks with that idiot Chris Hansen in the vanguard.

---------- Post added at 13:30 ---------- Previous post was at 13:11 ----------

*Don't think I am unfair to Chris Hansen. If he is not an idiot then he is an opportunistic butthole happy to make a buck off of wrecking people's lives with entrapment while abusing the hysteria of the people. Calling such a reckless greed bag and glutton for fame merely an "idiot" would be a compliment to such a creature.

---------- Post added at 15:18 ---------- Previous post was at 13:30 ----------

Some details about Somalia: Infant, child& maternal mortality rates in Somalia are among the highest -unicef

Reproductive health is a major problem in Somalia, with a maternal mortality ratio of 1,044 per 100,000 live births placing Somali women among the most high-risk groups in the world. Haemorrhage, prolonged and obstructed labour, infections and eclampsia (toxemia that may occur in late pregnancy) are the major causes of death at childbirth. Anaemia and female genital mutilation (infibulation) have a direct impact on, and aggravate these conditions. Poor antenatal, delivery and postnatal care, with an almost complete lack of emergency obstetric referral care for birth complications, further contribute to these high rates of mortality and disability source UNICEF

Percentagewise, using the above numbers, that would be only 1 percent of all pregnant women dying in childbirth, which is definitely high, but not really all that astounding for a place like Somalia. And I have no idea how many of those are among post-pubsecent pre-teens (got to be rare) and teens.

Early marriage is certainly happening in Somalia (http://www.unicef.org/infobycountry/somalia_58112.html) but its not really the problem, is it? Its what they do with the marriage that is the problem. There is no reason at all why a child or teen bride has to drop out of school and start having babies, anymore than a western female who went to college has to forget about being a housewife and instead have a business career.
 
Sorry if I kept you waiting on my reply. I don't really have an excuse for that, except that I got busy on other things.

I disagree with Waribald on several points, but I salute his post anyway. He has obviously given the subject some serious thought and he is treating it NOT in a reactionary fashion, but calmly addressing points. With a person like this its not necessary to argue as he is so much closer to the truth than most.

An exemplary function is not what I'm looking for, though I appreciate a healthy discussion without heated reactions. These days, everyone seems to disagree with everyone else and their proverbial grandmothers, and rarely is anyone able to do so in a civilised manner. Hence the internet is a flame war battleground, and politics and society in general becomes increasingly polarised.
I guess this kind of forum isn't a bad practice ground for learning to differ in opinion. For those willing to learn anyway.
That being said, I cannot guarantee I'll never partake in slinging some of the more heated bull at anyone :p

I hope you change your mind. That is EVIDENCE, and its the lack of such evidence to gets people forming their reactionary, negative opinions as they tend to GUESS the result must be disaster. On the opposite side, the news fills in evidence of the worst case scenario, and with nothing to balance or help find the truth or middle ground, and that is part of the reason they guess it must always be disaster. Even fictional movies play their part. I just watched part of "The Lovely Bones" and remarked how its movies like that twist people's beliefs about MAPs. The overwhelming majority are not remotely predators.

But it seems no one wants to talk publicly about the postives of their love lives, and that goes double if there was anything illegal or perceived as immoral. So we only hear of the complaints and the court cases and arrests. And the small-minded become witch hunters and the neo-Victorian Puritan rock spiders spew their sex negative agenda without much opposition.

But it disturbes me how people just dismiss such feelings and expressions of them as being meaningless, worthless or even dangerous or immoral, especially when it comes to girls standing up and making their own approach, something they should not feel at all ashamed about. And its funny how society then turns around and talks about the need to empower girls and young women! Like, "Hello!" Maybe society should not squash them in the first place?!?

That speaks directly to thread, which others have avoided, so thank you for that clear statement. I too have neve seen any trauma. Its almost like a myth and we are trying to prove there is no Zeus. But people firmly believe the myth with no evidence. How can we combat that?

I understand you want some hard evidence, but I'd rather respect people's privacy. Even without naming anyone, I won't risk someone strolling into this thread and noticing they're a subject of this debate.

Let me just say I've seen dozens of relations between minors and (young) adults during my scouting time. Some of them ended up getting married and started a family years later. Others, I guess the majority of these relations, didn't last for more than a few months.
There also happened quite a few one night stands. I was most firmly against these, and I still am. I do believe consent was always there, but those couples didn't love each other, these things happened on a sexual whim. That's dangerous. These can end far more easily in unexpected pregnancies. Just the rumour of a teenage girl having needed an abortion can be a serious stigma. I do believe a youth's environment (parents, school, scouting group,..) overreacts on such happenings, but surely teenage pregnancies can't be the rule and abortion, even purely on a biological/medical point of view, is not to be taken lightly either.

Growing up does involve learning, and in our scouting group important lessons were learned in a relatively controlled environment. This was so for many potential hazards in society: sexuality, drugs, alcohol, traffic,...
Teenagers tend to have difficulties in knowing their limits, but rather than being overly repressive, sometimes a brush with the more nasty experiences reality can give you, does more good than harm. This creates the mentioned earlier maturity. And I don't just mean those with the first hand experience: many can learn from a single mistake.

Even the approaches of ten year olds should be taken seriously. They can be silly in an adult's eyes, but they're not for the child. Ridicule them, or just ignore or dismiss them, and you end up hurting them far more than most people realise. As an adult, you don't like to be ignored or ridiculed either, right? Especially on such sensitive issues. And children don't even remotely have the ability to put things in perspective like adults have.

I also think you need better proof than pregnancy. Sex does not equal pregnancy, nor does marriage, nor should they. Even if we looked at the age of the youngest mothers in places with decent medical care for females, the risk to teens and preteens is only a few percentage points higher if I remember my research correctly. Granted there are more C-sections though. But don't take that to mean I advocate young pregnancy, because I do not. I am just saying that that is a risk that is exaggerated. I bet in Somalia, pregnant women die at a higher rate than most places at any age.

There's definitely a correlation between unprotected sex and pregnancy, wouldn't you agree? Among teenagers, some astounding misconceptions about sex can be prevalent: like "if I take a shower afterwards, I can't get pregnant." Seriously.
At least, if there is an adult involved, someone should know better. So why the law minds less about two early teens having sex, really is beyond me. For me the important things are consent, protection and care for your partner. These aren't independent values; if one of those is missing, the other two can't be fulfilled. Beyond that, age difference is imho just as marginally important than a great lot of other factors that makes every situation unique. The law should mind less about being repressive and more about the need for children to be properly informed from a relatively early age.

Another thing that disturbs me is how society seems to emphasize the importance of sex. Like "you become a man/woman if (and only if)..."
imho, it's fun, but you'll be hard pressed to make it last for more than 30 min. That's not worth the risk if you don't really know, let alone love someone, if you ask me. There's so much more to life than chasing after your basic drifts.

Percentagewise, using the above numbers, that would be only 1 percent of all pregnant women dying in childbirth, which is definitely high, but not really all that astounding for a place like Somalia. And I have no idea how many of those are among post-pubsecent pre-teens (got to be rare) and teens.

Early marriage is certainly happening in Somalia (UNICEF - Somalia - Gender equality classes help Somali teenage girls stay in school) but its not really the problem, is it? Its what they do with the marriage that is the problem. There is no reason at all why a child or teen bride has to drop out of school and start having babies, anymore than a western female who went to college has to forget about being a housewife and instead have a business career.

As your link mentions: in many countries, girls leave school and enter marriage as soon as they have their period. I remember I had a girl in my class who had hers when she was nine.

This link is about a study in Sweden on early motherhood and the risk of her baby being either stillborn or not surviving the first year.
Teenage pregnancies and risk of late fetal death and infant mortality - Olausson - 2005 - BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology - Wiley Online Library

This shows that early age (13 -15) just about doubles this risk compared to an age between 18 and 19, which is still quite young. And this statistic is about mothers that are provided proper medical care.

Going back to Somalia, which is just an example that can be compared with many other places around the world, you show me there 1 in 100 girls/women die in labor. If you look at that statistic more closely, you'll see this only considers mothers giving birth to a living child. Percentages that consider all deliveries would be hard to come by, because if there is no live birth, there isn't much proof of anything, especially in some backwater village. But surely mothers who deliver a stillborn are in even greater risk of complications.
Then there is non lethal injury to consider. It's probably safe to assume these could be a multiplication of the fatal ones. Do you know what a fistula is?

Delivering a baby seems to be hard enough for a grown woman if you ask me. Regardless of where it happens. I have no idea how anyone could argue for intelligent design after seeing a woman giving birth. But I guess that's another discussion.
 
Sorry if I kept you waiting on my reply. I don't really have an excuse for that, except that I got busy on other things.

No problem. I would rather you take the time to concentrate anyway, and glad you did.



An exemplary function is not what I'm looking for, though I appreciate a healthy discussion without heated reactions. These days, everyone seems to disagree with everyone else and their proverbial grandmothers, and rarely is anyone able to do so in a civilised manner. Hence the internet is a flame war battleground, and politics and society in general becomes increasingly polarised.
I guess this kind of forum isn't a bad practice ground for learning to differ in opinion. For those willing to learn anyway.
That being said, I cannot guarantee I'll never partake in slinging some of the more heated bull at anyone :p

Amen.



I understand you want some hard evidence, but I'd rather respect people's privacy. Even without naming anyone, I won't risk someone strolling into this thread and noticing they're a subject of this debate.

As much as I appreciate your desire to respect privacy, I hope you can appreciate how this conspiracy of secrecy has led to horrible misconceptions.


Let me just say I've seen dozens of relations between minors and (young) adults during my scouting time. Some of them ended up getting married and started a family years later. Others, I guess the majority of these relations, didn't last for more than a few months.

I prize anecdotal experience highly on this subject and glad to hear from someone who has some. That said, I am still going to critique it.


There also happened quite a few one night stands. I was most firmly against these, and I still am. I do believe consent was always there, but those couples didn't love each other, these things happened on a sexual whim. That's dangerous.

I appreciate that you are not howling to the moon over it like some people. You have qualms. That is fine.

But seriously, what can we really say beyond establishing consent? You don't like one night stands and neither do I. But who really is on the lookout for a one night stand? I have had a few, but I was never looking for them. They just turned out that way. Sometimes I realized things about her that I could not tolerate (like a horrible body. Because of clothes, it can be hard to tell.) Sometimes she did the same with me. You don't know until you try. Sometimes what I thought would be a one night stand turned into a relationship. Its part of the natural process of dating.

I don't much like those who seek one night stands, but seriously, sometimes the other does not mind. I know I have been glad to have just one chance and one night with certain women. Are not most of us the same? Can't women feel the same, even young ones?

And who are we to determine who is in love or who is not or when it should occur? I tend to put the breaks on my heart until a woman sleeps with me. I do this because it has been extreme heart-ache to fall in love with a woman who does not, will not or cannot love me back in a physical sense. Its a slap in the face to date a woman who shuns you while saying she loves you.


These can end far more easily in unexpected pregnancies.

I don't know how you figure that. Even with couples trying to take a baby, the average to make one is like 5 or 6 tries. Imagine if they are not trying! Of course one should be careful in a one-night stand as any sex session where a baby is unwanted.


Just the rumour of a teenage girl having needed an abortion can be a serious stigma. I do believe a youth's environment (parents, school, scouting group,..) overreacts on such happenings, but surely teenage pregnancies can't be the rule and abortion, even purely on a biological/medical point of view, is not to be taken lightly either.

Rumors and rumor mongering are sick. Its that that should be condemned, not sex.

But if you ask me, the prime reason for teenage abortions is inadequate sex education. For starters it must include DATING education. The real problem is with people trying to bury sex and hide it all the time. It has created a cesspool of ignorance.

But pregnancy is EASY to prevent.

Growing up does involve learning, and in our scouting group important lessons were learned in a relatively controlled environment. This was so for many potential hazards in society: sexuality, drugs, alcohol, traffic,...

I don't like you semantics. Sexuality is NOT a hazard. It contains hazards, but is NOT a hazard in itself, anymore than eating is a hazard.


Teenagers tend to have difficulties in knowing their limits, but rather than being overly repressive, sometimes a brush with the more nasty experiences reality can give you, does more good than harm. This creates the mentioned earlier maturity. And I don't just mean those with the first hand experience: many can learn from a single mistake.

And more get the wrong impression from a single mistake. For example, one bad experience with a member of the opposite sex can taint all of them in that person's eyes.

But I do like the tone of your paragraph. Denied experience, people only get dumber.


Even the approaches of ten year olds should be taken seriously. They can be silly in an adult's eyes, but they're not for the child. Ridicule them, or just ignore or dismiss them, and you end up hurting them far more than most people realise. As an adult, you don't like to be ignored or ridiculed either, right? Especially on such sensitive issues. And children don't even remotely have the ability to put things in perspective like adults have.

I like it all but the words "don't remotely". I think they can, if properly taught, be close enough. Adults are not the geniuses they often portray themselves as, compared to teens and children. The image of adulthood is over-done. Its something of a mind trick adults use to make children and teens feel inadequate and keep them down.

There's definitely a correlation between unprotected sex and pregnancy, wouldn't you agree? Among teenagers, some astounding misconceptions about sex can be prevalent: like "if I take a shower afterwards, I can't get pregnant." Seriously.
At least, if there is an adult involved, someone should know better. So why the law minds less about two early teens having sex, really is beyond me.

EXACTLY.

As for the misconceptions, why? Because of the conspiracy to hide everything sexual, that is why.

More later....
 
Back
Top Bottom